On 04/09/10 02:57, ncarver wrote: > > Well I will post a dissenting view of the OP's linked site. Yes there > are plenty of wacky "audiophiles" around, but there are probably even > more "everything measures perfect so it must sound perfect" types, and > they are just as deluded.
Yes, those are the two extremes, and as always the truth lies somewhere in the middle. <rest of rant snipped> I feel that you too are falling into trap of pigeon-holing people into one of two camps - either they're loony audiophiles with green pens and cables in the freezer, or they're measurement-obsessed scientists who don't really use their ears. Most of the talk about measurement, etc. on here is in relation to eliminating the possibility of expectation bias, ie. thinking something sounds better because you've spent a few quid on it. I don't think there are many on here that advocate equipment selection based on measurement alone. My view? Well, I have a background in sound engineering, and a degree in Acoustics so I am firmly in the middle ground. I generally trust my ears to tell me whether I like what I hear or not, but I also think that (in theory at least) it should be possible to measure any differences that my ears can hear. However, in practise, I don't think we yet know what to measure to do that. In the end, it's all about the music. For example, I have heard several performances of the Rachmaninov piano concertos, but the one I come back to is a very early recording of Rachmaninov himself playing them - poor sound but performances to die for. R. -- "Feed that ego and you starve the soul" - Colonel J.D. Wilkes http://www.theshackshakers.com/ _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
